单焦点、多焦点与可调节人工晶状体植入术后患者的拟调节力观察

doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.01.006

摘要
图/表
参考文献(18)
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF 829KB HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要

目的研究超声乳化白内障摘除植入不同人工晶状体（IOL）术后患者的拟调节力。方法前瞻性队列研究。行白内障超声乳化吸除联合IOL植入术且随访资料完整的患者73例（82眼），依据植入IOL的不同分为3组：单焦点IOL组28例（32眼），多焦点IOL组24例（27眼），可调节IOL组21例（23眼）。术后3 d、1周、1个月、3个月分别测量3组患者的裸眼远、中、近视力，最佳矫正远、近视力，及拟调节力。数据采用单因素方差分析。结果 3组的最佳矫正远、近视力及裸眼远视力差异无统计学意义，而裸眼中视力可调节IOL优于单焦点与多焦点IOL（F=4.50，P＜0.05），裸眼近视力多焦点、可调节IOL好于单焦点IOL（F=26.06，P＜0.05）。多焦IOL可以提供（2.67±0.49）D的主观拟调节力，（0.93±0.42）D的客观拟调节力；可调节IOL可以提供（3.00±0.78）D主观拟调节力，（0.91±0.58）D客观拟调节力；优于单焦点IOL的（1.78±0.26）D的主观拟调节力（F=18.51，P＜0.05），和（0.37±0.22）D的客观拟调节力（F=7.39，P＜0.05）。结论多焦点IOL与可调节性IOL均可提供较好的全程视力及拟调节力。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	张良
	赵江月
	冯莉
	张劲松

关键词 ：白内障, 人工晶状体, 单焦, 人工晶状体, 多焦, 人工晶状体, 可调节, 调节, 眼

Abstract：

Objective To compare pseudoaccommodation after cataract phacoemulsification combined with the implantation of different intraocular lenses （IOLs）. Methods In a prospective study， 73 patients （82 eyes） who had received IOL implants after cataract extraction were divided into three groups according to the implanted IOL： group 1， monofocal IOL， 28 patients， 32 eyes； group 2， multifocal IOL， 24 patients， 27 eyes； and group 3， accommodative IOL， 21 patients， 23 eyes. The uncorrected distance， intermediate and near visual acuity； best-corrected distance and near visual acuity； and pseudoaccommodation （respectively measured by Integrated Refractometer and iTrace Visual Function Analyzer 3.1） were measured. The data were collected at 3， 7， 30 and 90 days after surgery， and analyzed by a single-factor analysis of variance. Results The differences in the best-corrected distance visual acuity， near visual acuity and uncorrected distance visual acuity was not statistically significant， while uncorrected intermediate distance visual acuity of group 3 was better than groups 1 and 2 （F=4.50， P＜0.05）. The near visual acuity of groups 2 and 3 was better than group 1 （F=26.06， P＜0.05）. Subjective pseudoaccommodation of group 2 was 2.67±0.49 D and objective pseudoaccommodation was 0.93±0.42 D. Subjective pseudoaccommodation of group 3 was 3.0±0.78 D and objective pseudoaccommodation was 0.91±0.58 D. Both groups had better pseudoaccommodation than group 1 with 1.78±0.26 D for subjective pseudoaccommodation （F=18.51， P＜0.05） and 0.37±0.22 D for objective pseudoaccommodation （F=7.39， P＜0.05）. Conclusion Multifocal and accommodative IOLs can temporarily provide better visual acuity and pseudoaccommodation.

Key words： Cataract Intraocular lenses monofocal Intraocular lenses multifocal Intraocular lenses accommodative Accommodation ocular

收稿日期: 2011-11-02

通讯作者: 张劲松

引用本文:

张良,赵江月,冯莉,张劲松. 单焦点、多焦点与可调节人工晶状体植入术后患者的拟调节力观察[J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2013, 15(1): 21-25. ZHANG Liang,ZHAO Jiang-yue,FENG Li,ZHANG Jin-song. Clinical study of pseudoaccommodation in patients after the implantation of different intraocular lenses. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 2013, 15(1): 21-25. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.01.006

链接本文:

https://www.cjoovs.com/CN/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.01.006 或 https://www.cjoovs.com/CN/Y2013/V15/I1/21

[1]	Keeney AH， Hagman RE， Fratello CJ. Dictionary of Ophthalmic Optics. Newton， MA：Butterworth-Heinemann，1995：1345.
[2]	Glasser A. Restoration of accommodation. Curr Opin Ophthalmol，2006，17：12-18.
[3]	刘广川，李海祥. IOL眼调节功能研究进展. 国际眼科杂志，2007，7：450-453.
[4]	Win-Hall DM， Glasser A. Objective accommodation measurements in pseudophakic subjects using an autorefractor and an aberrometer. J Cataract Refract Surg，2009，35：282-290.
[5]	Dogru M， Honda R， Omoto M， et al. Early visual results with the 1CU accommodating intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg，2005，31：895-902.
[6]	Langenbucher A， Huber S， Nguyen NX， et al. Measurement of accommodation after implantation of an accommodating posterior chamber intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg， 2003，29：677-685.
[7]	Wold JE， Hu A， Chen S， et al. Subjective and objective measurement of human accommodative amplitude. J Cataract Refract Surg，2003，29：1878-1888.
[8]	Abbott ML， Schmid KL， Strang NC. Differences in the accommodation stimulus response curves of adult myopes and emmetropes. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt，1998，18：13-20.
[9]	Hazel CA， Cox MJ， Strang NC. Wavefront aberration and its relationship to the accommodative stimulus-response function in myopic subjects. Optom Vis Sci，2003，80：151-158.
[10]	Win-Hall DM， Glasser A. Objective accommodation measurements in prepresbyopic eyes using an autorefractor and an aberrometer. J Cataract Refract Surg，2008，34：774-784.
[11]	Wolffsohn JS， Naroo SA， Motwani NK， et al. Subjective and objective performance of the Lenstec KH-3500 ″accommodative″ intraocular lens. Br J Ophthalmol，2006，90：693-696.
[12]	Montés-Micó R， EspaÑa E， Bueno I， et al. Visual performance with multifocal intraocular lenses： mesopic contrast sensitivity under distance and near conditions. Ophthalmology，2004，111： 85-96.
[13]	Mester U， Hunhold W， Wesendahl T， et al. Functional outcomes after implantation of Tecnis ZM900 and Array SA40 multifocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg，2007，33：1033-1040.
[14]	Souza CE， Muccioli C， Soriano ES， et al. Visual performance of AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive IOL： a prospective comparative trial. Am J Ophthalmol，2006，141：827-832.
[15]	Strenk SA， Semmlow JL， Strenk LM， et al. Age-related changes in human ciliary muscle and lens： a magnetic resonance imaging study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci，1999，40：1162-1169.
[16]	Ludwig K， Wegscheider E， Hoops JP， et al. In vivo imaging of the human zonular apparatus with high-resolution ultrasound biomicroscopy. Graefe Arch CliIl Exp Ophthalmol，1999，237：361-371.
[17]	McLeod SD， Portney V， Ting A. A dual optic accommodating foldable intraocular lens. Br J Ophthalmol，2003，87：1083-1085.
[18]	Hao X， Jeffery JL， Wilkie JS， et al. Functionalised polysiloxanes as injectable， in situ curable accommodating intraocular lenses. Biomaterials，2010，31：8153-8163.